Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose une reconceptualisation de la discipline sociologique ainsi que de sa place dans le monde actuel. Nous remettrons tout d'abord en question l'idée même que la sociologie puisse être considérée en tant que discipline académique dans le sens habituel du terme, tout comme le fait qu'il soit possible de distinguer, à la manière des sciences de la nature, autant de disciplines distinctes au sein du champ des sciences sociales. Au contraire, nous defendrons la thèse selon laquelle la sociologie et ses disciplines connexes furent plutôt constitueés en tant que champs sociaux à travers un processus historique particulier. Cette analyse nous permettra de réaffirmer la position centrale qu'occupe la sociologie dans le champ de la recherche sociale, de par les liens étroits qu'elle entretient avec les autres disciplines qui constituent ce champ, ainsi que par sa nature interdisciplinaire et critique. Cette reconceptualisation implique qu'une ontologie sociale claire fondée sur une méthodologie cohérente, en l'occurence le réalisme critique, puisse remédier aux tendences centrifuges propre à la discipline, en renforçant sa capacité à analyser les problèmes sociaux, et donc à contribuer à défendre et à élargir les pratiques démocratiques au fondement d'un avenir meilleur. This article proposes a re‐visioning of sociology and of its relationship to the late‐modern world it inhabits. I first problematize the claim that sociology is a discipline in any ordinary sense of the term, indeed, that social science can be reasonably cleaved into “disciplines” on the model of natural science. I then explore the thesis that sociology and kindred pursuits have been constituted as fields. Finally, I argue that among the fields of social scientific inquiry, the sociological terrain is of great import, as a nexus whose permeability, dense connectivity to other fields and critical transdisciplinarity are prime assets. By implication, the remedy for centrifugal tendencies that worry some sociologists is greater clarity on matters of social ontology and, on that basis, a coherent methodology (critical realism) that can strengthen sociology's capacity to understand our troubled world and to defend and enrich democratic practices that may portend a better future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".